; -V ' ' \ \ v •• Seym our PAi 175 COLLEGE SERIES OF GREEK AUTHORS EDITED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF JOHN WILLIAMS WHITE and THOMAS D. SEYMOUR. INTRODUCTION TO THE Language and Verse OF Homer BY THOMAS D. SEYMOUR Hillhouse Professor of Greek in Yale College, bostok college library CHESTNUT RIEL, M ASS, GINN AND COMPANY BOSTON • NEW YORK • CHICAGO • LONDON ATLANTA • DALLAS • COLUMBUS • SAN FRANCISCO Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1885, by John Williams White and Thomas D. Seymour jh the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington Copyright, 1913, by SARAH H. SEYMOUR 516.4 140486 GTfje satfjenseum $3 r e s $ GINN AND COMPANY • PRO¬ PRIETORS • BOSTON • U.S.A. PREFACE. This Introduction is not designed to lay stress on Ho¬ meric language as contrasted with Homeric poetry, but is intended to relieve the commentary of explanations of dialectic forms and metrical peculiarities, and to call the student’s attention to the most noteworthy characteristics of Homeric style and syntax. In reading Homer, certain questions, which cannot be avoided, as to the origin and rela¬ tion of forms, will attract less of the pupil’s attention and demand less of the teacher’s time in the class-room if the facts are stated in their proper connection ; the grouping of these facts will make them more intelligible and more easily remembered. Some peculiarities of form have not been mentioned here, since they occur so seldom that they may be treated in the commentary just as conveniently; while for divers reasons other anomalies which are no more frequent have been discussed. Nor has the author planned to make the col¬ lection of examples complete ; the student should be en¬ couraged to gather illustrations for himself. Most of this Introduction is of a nature to be read rather than committed to memory. Much of it is unnecessary for a beginner, but the author hopes that none of it is beyond the comprehension and appreciation of the student. While parts of it can be made fully useful only by a wise teacher, most of it should be helpful to the undirected student. Yale College, July, 1885. TABLE OF CONTENTS. I. Homeric Style. PAGE § 1. a. Translations . 1 b. Change of Subject . 7 c. Direct Discourse . 7 d. Principal Clauses . 8 f. Order of Words . 9 n. Epithets . 11 s. Synonymous Expressions .13 t. Epexegesis . 13 w. Stereotyped Expressions . . 14 § 2. a. Pareehesis . 15 e. Comparisons . 16 1. Asyndeton . 18 o. Chiasmus . 19 p. Epanalepsis . 20 r. Litotes . 20 s. Periphrasis . 21 t. Zeugma . 21 u. Hysteron Proteron . 22 v. Later Change in Words. . .22 II. Homeric Syntax. § 3. b. Modes . 24 d. Cases . 25 f. Genitive Absolute . 26 g. Dative of Interest . 26 1. Particles . 28 m. Interrogative Particles ... .29 n. Parataxis . 30 q. Correlative Construction . .31 III. Homeric Dialect. PAGE § 8. Crasis . 40 9. Hiatus . 40 10. Elision . 41 11. Apocope . 42 12. Consonants . 43 13. Metathesis . . . 45 14. The Digamma . 45 15. Special Case-Endings . 49 16. Eirst Declension . 50 17. Second Declension . . . 51 18. Third Declension . 52 19. Anomalous Forms . 55 20. Adjectives . 56 21. Patronymics . 57 22. Comparison of Adjectives . . .59 23. Numerals . 60 24. Pronouns . 62 25. Augment and Reduplication .65 26. Verb-Endings . 67 27. Subjunctive Mode . 70 28. Optative Mode . 70 29. Contract Verbs . 70 30. Future and First Aorist . 72 31. Perfect . 73 32. Middle Voice . 74 33. Passive Voice . 75 34. Verbs in -yui . 75 35. Second Aorist without Varia¬ ble Vowel . 77 36. Iterative Forms . 77 37. Prepositions . 78 38. Adverbs . 79 § 4. Introductory 5. Vowels . 6. Contraction . 7 . Synizesis . . . . 33 IV. Homeric Verse. ..37 39. Heroic Hexameter ..39 40. Caesural Pauses .. ..39 41. Quantity . Indexes, 95. 81 83 86 HOMERIC STYLE. § 1. a. Translations. Matthew Arnold enumerates four essential characteristics of Homer’s poetry:1 “Homer is rapid in his movement, Homer is plain in his words and style, Homer is simple in his ideas, Homer is noble in his manner. Cowper renders him ill because he is slow in his movement and elaborate in his style ; Pope renders him ill because he is artificial both in his style and in his words ; Chapman renders him ill because he is fantastic in his ideas ; Mr. Newman renders him ill because he is odd in his words and ignoble in his manner.” Or in other words s “ Between Cowper and Homer there is interposed the mist of Cowper’s elaborate Miltonic manner, entirely alien to the flowing rapidity of Homer ; between Pope and Homer there is interposed the mist of Pope’s literary, artificial manner, entirely alien to the plain naturalness of Homer’s manner ; between Chapman and Homer there is interposed the mist of the fancifulness of the Elizabethan age, entirely alien to the plain directness of Plomer’s thought and feeling ; while between Mr. Newman and Homer is interposed a cloud of more than Egyptian thickness, — namely, a manner, in Mr. Newman’s version eminently ignoble, while Homer’s manner is eminently noble.” Jf poets and masters have thus failed, it is evident that it is no easy achievement to translate Homer well, to be at the same time rapid, plain, simple, and noble, — ov 7ra)? a/xa 1 Essays in Criticism, Boston, 1865, pp. 284 ff., or Studies in Celtic Literature and on Translating Homer , Macmillan, N.Y., 1883, pp. 138 ff. 2 HOMERIC STYLE. [§ 1, «. 7 rdvra Svvrjaecu avrbs eXecrOcu. The beginner can at least be simple ; he should aim to attain the other qualities also. It is instructive to compare different translations of a famous passage, © 555 ff. : — d)? S’ or iv ovpavw aarpa (fraetvrjv dptcfn aeXrjvigv cfyaiver dpirrperrea, ore r eifkero vrjveptos aWpp • etc r e